Plea to demolish office of Magadh commissioner

GAYA: A piquant situation arose on Wednesday as Magadh division commissioner Jitendra Srivastav was discharging his quasi judicial function as appellate authority in the public grievance redressal mechanism. A petitioner approached him with a demand to demolish the very office in which the commissioner heard the grievances. Armed with RTI responses and court orders, the petitioner, Brajnandan Pathak, demanded the demolition of the office on the ground that the office was constructed on a plot which used to be a water body (tank) named Dighi Talab and the Supreme Court (SC) has ordered restoration of all water bodies for environmental and allied reasons.The SC orders dated 28.01.2011, 25.07.2011, and Patna high court order dated 06.04.2017 were cited to justify the demolition demand.
Gaya already faces acute water scarcity and the now extinct water bodies including the one where the commissioner's office was located used to be the main source of sub-surface water recharge. If that was not enough, the petitioner, an RTI activist, further alleged that the map for commissioner's office was not approved by the competent authority and in support of his allegation, he submitted an RTI reply given by the Gaya Municipal Corporation, the competent authority saying therein that the map was not approved.
Sources said besides the commissioner's office, office of the Magadh Range DIG, DSP and several other offices are also located in the same building. Spread over an area of 1.06 acre , the commissioner's office was constructed two decades back. Earlier, the commissioner's office was located in what is now the official residence of the jail superintendent.
The petitioner also annexed copies of official notification issued by C Ashokvardhan, the then principal secretary, revenue and land reforms directing concerned officials to ensure compliance of the SC order on the restoration of water bodies. The petitioner claimed that as per Cathedral Survey records of 1914, a water body existed on plot no. 13392.
The commissioner has deferred the grievance hearing for January 30. He has summoned the Gaya municipal commissioner to be physically present during the next hearing as the municipal body’s RTI response is the basis on which the demolition demand has been made.
Legal opinion is divided on the issue whether the commissioner should sit in judgement on an issue in which he is a party in his official capacity and the conflict of interest dictum says that you can not be a judge in a dispute in which you have got any interest.
However, civil lawyer Ashok Kumar said that there was nothing wrong in the commissioner passing an order in the matter as he has no personal stake in it and if the party is not satisfied with the final order, it can go in appeal against the same.